Darwin's Dogmatic Defenders

An Austrian Roman Catholic Cardinal, Christoph Schoenborn, called for common sense in the debate over "Intelligent Design," and so he was summarily accused of trying teach the first chapter of Gensis as science in elementary schools and has been branded a "simpleton."

Of course, teaching a literal reading of Genesis 1 as if it was a scientific theory is not at all what he was calling for, but simply for taking Intelligent Design's critiques of Darwinism more seriously.

Read More:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051120/sc_nm/religion_evolution_cardinal_dc

It has been suggested by some with regard to the current debates about "Intelligent Design" that critics of this theory, who have dismissed it as "6 Day Creationism," are in fact doing just that: dismissing it (by means of some derogatory label) without actually learning about it. Could it be that in certain segments of academia (in some biology departments where individuals have built their entire careers on certain philosophical committments perhaps?) there is a dogmatic or ideological censorship and dismissal of anything that challenges the status quo? I can certainly concieve of why some may have a vested interest in doing so.

If the dogmatic materialist-Darwinists are correct, what have they to fear from a little bit more discussion? What have they to fear from open and honest criticism?

It almost seems that some of our top scientists are approaching the issue of "Intelligent Design" with their eyes squeezed tight shut, and their hands over their ears screaming "it's not science! it's religion!" at the top of their lungs. But I am not sure if that will further the cause of learning more about our world.